Archives

Text

The Ghomeshi Verdict: Part 4

“Ghomeshi kept trophies to manipulate and prevent women from going to the police.”

You know how some people keep everything they ever got? They call them packrats, and that’s one reason why former CBC golden boy, Jian Ghomeshi, was able to beat the sexual assault charges in late March.

Jesse Brown, the Canadian journalist who first broke the story about Ghomeshi’s dismissal from CBC, has compiled and interviewed an interesting group of additional Ghomeshi victims.

Many of the successful challenges to the alleged victims/witnesses’ evidence at his recent trial were based on Mr. Ghomeshi’s retention of letters and emails from the women in his life.

For example, former actress Lucy DeCoutere’s courtroom downfall was due in part to a letter from her to Mr. Ghomeshi that he retained for 13 years; a letter that contradicted her evidence at trial. Why would Ghomeshi keep this letter from a woman who was not his girlfriend and whom he had no sexual relationship?

Mr. Brown believes that he kept files on women in case they would later accuse him of violence… a shocking suggestion, but one based on multiple candid interviews conducted by him.

In 2013 Mr. Ghomeshi sent a letter to a woman, 20 years his junior, after she confronted him about non-consensual violence during their sexual tryst. He wrote:

“Dear _______, ….it IS about sex. it WAS…..i have text messages from you saying you want this…the ‘rough sex’…was something you were very interested in…you WANTED it to continue the next day and in subsequent messages and notes…reread our texts and re-examine our conversations if you wish… i wish for good karma into 2013. yours, jian”

When Mr. Brown interviewed the young woman he asked her what had occurred on their date. She described being slammed against a wall, choked from behind, and repeatedly punched in the head. When asked if she expected this behaviour from Ghomeshi she said there had been an online flirtation concerning rough sex and submission, but she had no idea what she was in for. She said, “I didn’t know men hit women like that during sex.”

The pain was so bad she considered going to the hospital, but Mr. Ghomeshi pleaded with her to give him another chance. He also admitted he was raised in a violent family. She spent another evening with him where he “behaved”, but later she accused him of manipulating her. That’s when he aggressively responded “I have text messages…you WANTED it.”

Investigative reporter Jesse Brown confirmed that he spoke to 23 victims in total and at least three of them described similar scenarios. Ghomeshi would engage in email conversations with his “dates” about BSM (bondage, sadism and masochism) but suggest it was all fantasy. He told them that sexual experimentation was healthy and when they resisted, taunted them as not being “ready” for a guy like him. He asked for nude photos demanding explicit, pornographic poses.

Mr. Ghomeshi kept emails and photos as “trophies”, evidence he would rely on if needed. Mr. Brown reports that his tactics have effectively muted many of the women who would like to speak out, but will not.

Ghomeshi has another trial in June 2016 with another victim. Let’s hope justice prevails….

Post navigation

2 thoughts on “The Ghomeshi Verdict: Part 4”

Your last line – Let’s hope justice prevails…. seems to ran against the timber of you previous three entries into this discussion – Where you seemed to be on the same page as the Lawyer for this accused – That justice is a system not a verdict we like and justice not prevailing is a verdict we did not like –
For Justice to prevail
Yes i read carefully every word of the ruling – i was amazed how well His Honour parsed his words so carefully so readers would be clear as to why he found as he did – that the witnesses spent their credibility vouchers in an attempt to create a verdict prior to trial with orchestrated evidence –
Few if any have mentioned that each accuser had their own lawyer (which is not the Crown) yet no one says much about what each of them had to say or not say –

For Justice to prevail then it must as per definition either pursude someone (in this case the judge)
or prove more powerful than opposing forces (in this case cast out all doubt as regards to the accuser’s credibility) –

one griper on this particular case even suggested the accuser’s lawyers should have prepared them better. Lawyers do not “prepare” a testimony prior to court – at least that has not occurred in the times i have had to have been there –
once as a juror –
several times as witness –
once in a court of workplace accusations by fellow workers that resulted in my own promotion 3 months later
once as being sued personally –
once as being the appellant in a tribunal –
once as the representative for employer side in an appeal-
and once upcoming being sued professionally –

in all cases the lawyer or person representing for me asked me to do one thing for them – respond truthfully to them – in their office as they prepared so they could go forward with the best built case possible – as such we spent hours in the office talking about stuff that really did not seem to have anything to do with the case –

there was never any need to request what that meant – any more than His Honour’s remarks that navigating the system is simple – one needs only to tell the truth – the whole truth and nothing but the truth –

and in another set of online comments i have seen that remark disemboweled by an observer who said there is nothing simple about the Canadian Justice System – ( i can not recall who that was -sorry)

Anyway back to the point – Justice prevailed in the first trial – The truth was held back by the accusers – that was their goal – to present only what they decided they required to paint the accused as black as possible –

I too keep stuff – pack rat like – and it is not to “catch ” accusers ” it is simply because i have grown up under depression raised parents who barked to keep every receipt and every letter – for a life record –

Interestingly when being sued personally – they claimed a particular set of facts –
i paid great amounts @$5 /per page to access another packrat keeper of records – indeed two of them – Telus and Royal Bank – to show that the claim they other side made was indeed false as these two trophy keepers –the bank and the phone company showed other than the other side claimed – and on that occasion a former officer of the court lied for the other side to say i was – when bank and phone records clearly showed i was not – (a former parole officer)

Later one of the many people who lied for the other side sent me an email of apology – that they had no idea the mesh of deception the other person had tied them up into – – that occasion cost 40K$ to pay off the other side to go away as they were mounting up a fresh attack once paperwork arrived –

and who got the 40K$?
Thier lawyer and provincial tax rolls which had been left hanging while they thought they were going to sue me into where ever

Justice prevails every time the accusers do not speak the whole truth –
Justice prevails every time the accusers fail when trying to use the court as a tool of personal vengeance
Justice prevails every time an accused can sit on their hands and keep their mouth shut while the accusers say the most horrific things – (the truth of which is sometimes unknown )
Justice prevails every time a person walks away from accusers -vindicated by the inherent sloppiness of their lies –
Justice prevails sometimes even when all the rest of the system fails –